Ed Miller Business Development Project Manager

1. Wyoming Natural Gas Pipeline Authority Ed MillerBusiness Development Project Manager El Paso Rockies Export Project August 30, 2005

2. Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-looking Statements This presentation includes forward-looking statements and projections, made in reliance on the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The company has made every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and assumptions on which these statements and projections are based are current, reasonable, and complete. However, a variety of factors could cause actual results to differ materially from the projections, anticipated results or other expectations expressed in this presentation, including, without limitation, the ability to implement and achieve our objectives in the long-range plan; changes in commodity prices for oil, natural gas, and power; inability to realize anticipated synergies and cost savings associated with restructurings and divestitures on a timely basis; our ability to obtain necessary governmental approvals for proposed pipeline projects and our ability to successfully construct and operate such projects; the risks associated with recontracting of transportation commitments by our pipelines; regulatory uncertainties associated with pipeline rate cases; general economic and weather conditions in geographic regions or markets served by El Paso Corporation and its affiliates, or where operations of the company and its affiliates are located; the uncertainties associated with governmental regulation; difficulty in integration of the operations of previously acquired companies, competition, and other factors described in the company’s (and its affiliates’) Securities and Exchange Commission filings. While the company makes these statements and projections in good faith, neither the company nor its management can guarantee that anticipated future results will be achieved. Reference must be made to those filings for additional important factors that may affect actual results. The company assumes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements made herein or any other forward-looking statements made by the company, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise.

3. Rocky Mountain Supply(Volumes are Wellhead – Measured in MMcf/d) 1.5 Bcf/d Forecast by 2010: High Case 13,000 Mid Case 9,500 Low Case 7,200 1990-2002: Wellhead total data from IHS database 2003: Estimate 2004-2010: CIG forecast

4. Cheyenne Plains Throughputvs. Midcontinent MidCon less Cheyenne Hub Differential vs. Cheyenne Plains Rate August 1-24, 2005

5. Projected Demand Growth Bcf/d WesternCanada 5.3 6.4 7.3 3.7 4.1 4.7 EasternCanada 2.5 2.7 3.1 NW and Alaska Maritimesand Northeast U.S. 9.0 10.1 11.7 10.5 10.9 11.6 3.8 4.7 5.2 4.0 4.2 4.9 6.3 7.2 7.7 8.7 11.1 14.4 Total 2004 72.8 2009 82.2 2014 93.6 14.1 14.6 16.2 5.0 6.2 7.0 Mexico Source: El Paso/ Energy Information Agency

6. Connectivity / Liquidity (MMcf/d)

7. Cost of Capacity Shortage Out of RockiesEstimated Revenue Lost per Bcf/d of Rockies Production Net Present Value at 20% Pre-Tax $2/Mcf Basis $1/Mcf Basis $0.25/Mcf Transport

8. Overview • Two alternatives • Opal to Campbellsville, Kentucky • Opal to Perryville, Louisiana

9. Rockies Export Project RouteSchematic • Propose as seamless • Downstream transport with rate certainty available as part of projects Opal Wamsutter Cheyenne ANR Tennessee Campbellsville Tennessee to Sonat Greensburg Tennessee ANR Sonat Perryville

10. Perryville • Can be constructed economically for smaller volumes; minimal risk of delay; shortest and cheapest route • Range of rates from $1.10 to $1.40/Dth from Opal to Perryville depending upon commitments (includes $7 fuel) • Range of Rockies commitments required from 600 MDth/d up • Additional seamless rates to Pugh (SNG Zone 1; TGP 500 Leg / 800 Leg; Transco Z3, Z4; PGT Z2, Z3; Tetco M-1); Lebanon, Cornell (DTI), Joliet Hub, and others • Rates become more attractive as commitments increase • Accesses highest demand growth area in the U.S. in southeast • Recent Florida basis is $1.00 to Henry • Late 2008 in-service • Also directly accesses east coast pipelines and existing shippers • Interim capacity available to Greensburg by March 2007 as part of project

11. Campbellsville • Balances gaining close proximity to Northeast markets while minimizing risk of delays • Avoids construction through Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio • Based upon previous proposed projects, building through those states will cause 2-year delay or more to in-service • Range of rates from $1.30 to $1.45/Dth from Opal (includes $7 fuel) • Range of Rockies commitments required from 1.5 to 2 Bcf/d • 500 MDth/d of downstream capacity available to Ellsworth (near Leidy area) on Tennessee • More expensive than Perryville • Late 2008 in-service • Interim capacity available to Greensburg by March 2007 as part of project

12. Development Schedule • One-on-one meetings with potential shippers through September to present detailed rates, route info, etc. • Precedent Agreements – September and October 2005 • Begin NEPA work November 2005 • Anticipated in-service late 2008 on either project

13. Contacts • Contact myself or Laine Lobban to schedule detailed proposal presentation • Ed Miller (719) 520-4305 • Laine Lobban (719) 520-4344